More Canadians want to join the military, but enlisted members keep leaving
Interest has spiked in the Canadian military, with recruitment levels hitting their highest point in a decade. But as more people walk in the door, thousands of enlisted members are deciding to walk out.
Numbers obtained by Global News show the retention crisis worsened year over year, as Prime Minister Mark Carney who is attending the NATO summit in Brussels, vows to rebuild the Armed Forces and reduce Canada's dependence on the U.S.
'The reason why retention has not been improving is because the military has been putting all of his eggs in the recruitment basket,' said Charlotte Duval-Lantoine, a defence analyst with the Canadian Global Affairs Institute.
0:45
'A real end': Trump says he wants Iran to 'give up entirely' on nuclear weapons
According to figures from the Department of National Defence, attrition rates in the regular forces increased, with 5,026 leaving the military between 2024 and 2025, compared with 4,256 during the same period the previous year.
Story continues below advertisement
Retention among reservists improved slightly during the past two years. Overall, the situation has remained largely stagnant, the DND numbers show.
'This is knowledge and readiness that we're losing that new recruits cannot replace immediately … and skills that are necessary to defend Canada,' Duval-Lantoine said.
6:20
PM Carney pledges to meet NATO's 2% defence spending target this year
Recruitment in the regular forces hit a record high this fiscal year, but not all 6,706 enrolled will pass basic training. The gains are offset by the loss of 5,026 members.
Get daily National news
Get the day's top news, political, economic, and current affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day. Sign up for daily National newsletter Sign Up
By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy
More people are considering careers in the Canadian Armed Forces, as Canada's relationship with the U.S. undergoes a major shift, and Ottawa vows to prioritize defence and increase pay for military personnel.
U.S. President Donald Trump has repeatedly threatened Canadian sovereignty and has not backed away from punishing tariffs. The CAF cautions it's too early to link the jump in interest to Trump's rhetoric and policies.
Story continues below advertisement
The military has widened eligibility recently to include permanent residents and applicants with certain medical conditions, while modernizing recruitment with a new online portal.
5:59
Breaking Down Canada's Defence Spending Plan
Unless the military can hold onto more currently serving members, Duval-Lantoine doubts it will fill a shortage of roughly 13,000 personnel or meet its targets of 71,500 regular force members and 30,000 reservists by 2030.
'It's too slow of a growth. There really needs to be more aggressive measures,' she said.
'The lack of urgency is quite scary from my point of view.'
4:51
Canada-U.S. trade talks accelerate as Carney hosts G7 leaders in Alberta
Story continues below advertisement
DND says the 'fluctuation' in the attrition rate is 'within the normal range' and consistent with Canada's allies.
'There are a wide variety of reasons members choose to stay in or leave the CAF, so it is difficult to attribute it to one or a few specific factors,' department spokesperson Derek Abma said in a statement to Global News.
But defence experts point to issues around training and career management, a lack of affordable housing, and pay.
Earlier this month, Defence Minister David McGuinty said CAF personnel will be getting a salary bump, but did not specify when.
'That's where a lot of the initial investment will be, of course, including a 20 per cent pay increase,' he told reporters June 10.
A day earlier, Carney announced an additional $9.3 billion in military funding to meet the NATO target of spending two per cent of GDP on defence.
Of that, $2.6 billion will go towards recruitment, salary hikes and hiring an additional 1,400 new staff, said government officials, speaking on background, at a technical briefing on June 9.
9:55
Former Chief of the Defence Staff reacts to spending plans
More than 77,000 people hit 'Apply Now' on the Armed Forces' website, the highest number in five years, but less than 10 per cent — 6,706 – made it to the finish line and enrolled
Story continues below advertisement
The military says a large number of people never finish their applications. It's not clear how many are completed, but Duval-Lantoine insists there isn't enough staff to handle the intake.
Canada's former chief of the defence staff, retired general Wayne Eyre, acknowledges there is no 'silver bullet' to solve the personnel crisis, but he would like to see the military be less risk-averse, something the CAF, like most government institutions, has struggled with.
'The secret to success is the willingness to experiment, to try new things. If it doesn't work well, fine. Learn from it. If it does, take it up to scale,' Eyre said.
'We've got to keep our foot on the gas…. We've got to get as many qualified members of Canadian society in the door as quickly as possible.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CTV News
an hour ago
- CTV News
New tool to challenge greenwashing claims goes live as companies weigh strategy
Greenpeace activists protest BP's Calgary headquarters, alleging that the company's environmental claims contradicted its oilsands investments, on Thursday, April 15, 2010. The company sold its last oilsands holdings in CANADIAN PRESS/Jeff McIntosh. TORONTO — It's been a year now since a new law took effect that requires companies to back up their environmental claims, but there's still a lot of unknowns about how the anti-greenwashing rules will play out. What is clear so far is that they've already reduced what companies are choosing to say about their environmental record, even as the biggest source of worry for many — an option for the public to initiate claims — is only now kicking in. The pullback started as soon as the law came into effect on June 20 last year, when the Pathways Alliance group of oilsands companies scrubbed all content from its website and social media feeds. Since then there have been other high-profile moves blamed on the law, including RBC dropping its sustainable finance target and several climate metrics, and CPP Investments ditching its net-zero emission by 2050 target, but there have also been numerous other companies that have made quieter adjustments. 'I can say with 100 per cent certainty that many organizations across many industries in Canada are revisiting their disclosure,' said Conor Chell, national leader of ESG law at KPMG in Canada. 'There's a lot of disclosure that was pulled from the public domain.' Companies have raised concerns about the broad, vague wording of the provision in Bill C-59 that requires them to backup environmental claims with 'internationally recognized methodology,' and the threat of penalties of up to three per cent of global revenues if they're found to be in violation of the law. Many companies and groups have called for the additions to be scrapped, while the Alberta Enterprise Group and the Independent Contractors and Businesses Association have launched a constitutional challenge, alleging the law is a breach of freedom of expression protections. The Competition Bureau has tried to address at least the uncertainty of the law by providing guidelines, with a finalized version out just over two weeks ago. Some have said the guidelines are still too vague, while others like the Pathways Alliance say they provide no assurance at all, because the Competition Bureau isn't bound by them, while the Competition Tribunal doesn't have to adhere to them. And it's the Competition Tribunal that many companies are especially worried about. A clause in the law that went into effect Friday allows the public to bypass the bureau, and directly ask the tribunal to hear a case. 'From the perspective of many of our clients, the real risk lies in that private right of action,' said Chell. The clause has raised fears of a flood of cases against companies, tying them up in legal wrangling at the court-like tribunal, possibly for years, and the costs that come along with such disputes. 'We believe the amendments ... should be removed to allow businesses to speak openly and truthfully about what they are doing to improve environmental performance and without fear of meritless litigation by private entities,' said Pathways president Kendall Dilling in a statement. But environmental groups have played down the threat. Ecojustice finance lawyer Tanya Jemec said the narrative that there is going to be a wave of filings is overblown, since bringing a case is time consuming and resource intensive, while they will have to meet a public-interest threshold before being allowed to proceed. 'I think there is a lot of fearmongering going on out there, and efforts, whether intentional or not, to undermine these anti-greenwashing provisions.' Some, including Green Party Leader Elizabeth May, have questioned whether the new greenwashing laws were needed at all, given deceptive marketing practices were already covered by the Competition Act. But Jemec said the existing process takes years, with no updates along the way from the bureau, while being able to take cases to the tribunal will increase transparency and relieve pressure on the bureau. She said the reaction to the new laws, which also set elevated standards and penalties to the existing general protections, shows they were needed. 'The fact that companies are looking at what they are saying and changing course just may be an indication that the provisions are doing their work.' Pushing companies to make sure they can back up their environmental claims improves competition, by making room for those legitimately trying to do better, said Wren Montgomery, associate professor at Western University's Ivey Business School. 'It's often these smaller, newer, really sustainable, pure-play sustainability companies that the innovation is coming from,' she said, noting she's seen in sectors ranging from fashion to wine. 'In my research, we see that greenwash is driving them out, so it's making it really hard for them to get rewarded for bringing that value to the market.' Others, including Calgary-based clean-tech investor Avatar Innovations, have raised concerns that the higher reporting standards could hold back startups, both because of the compliance burden and the lack of established testing standards for emerging technology. Montgomery said there are many established standards, and more being added, to cover environmental claims. 'My larger concern is not that a reporting standard is going to inhibit innovation. It's that greenwashing is going to inhibit innovation, and I think the latter is a much bigger concern for Canada.' It's not just smaller companies affected. Chell at KPMG said that for a while every company was clamouring to get out net-zero targets for the competitive advantage, but that advantage kept fading as more and more did it. He said if the law works as intended, only companies that can actually substantiate claims will be able to do so, especially for those 'big ostentatious claims like net zero, carbon neutrality.' 'So there is actually, I think, a competitive advantage for companies that can make those claims and back them up credibly.' Whether the law is truly effective, or just forcing companies to say less out of caution, is still unclear, but it's certainly brought more focus to the problem, said Chell. 'If the intent was to draw attention to greenwashing as an issue, I would say that that objective has certainly been achieved.' This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 22, 2025. Ian Bickis, The Canadian Press
CTV News
an hour ago
- CTV News
Carney travelling to Europe for security, defence talks with EU, NATO
Prime Minister Mark Carney greets NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte at the G7 Summit in Kananaskis, Alta., on Tuesday, June 17, 2025. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Adrian Wyld OTTAWA — Prime Minister Mark Carney will depart for Europe on Sunday for back-to-back summits where he is expected to make major commitments for Canada on security and defence. Carney will be joined by Foreign Affairs Minister Anita Anand, Defence Minister David McGuinty and secretary of state for defence procurement Stephen Fuhr at the EU and NATO summits, where military procurement and diversifying supply chains will top the agendas. The international meetings come as Canada looks to reduce its defence procurement reliance on the United States due to strained relations over tariffs and President Donald Trump's repeated talk about Canada becoming a U.S. state. Carney will fly first to Brussels, Belgium, starting the trip with a visit to the Antwerp Schoonselhof Military Cemetery where 348 Canadian soldiers are buried. He will also meet with Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever, European Council President António Costa and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. At the EU-Canada summit, Anand and McGuinty are expected to sign a security and defence agreement with the EU in what one European official described Friday as one of the most ambitious deals Europe has ever signed with a third country. The agreement will open the door to Canada's participation in the ReArm Europe initiative, allowing Canada to access a 150-billion-euro loan program for defence procurement, called Security Action for Europe. An EU official briefing reporters on Friday said once the procurement deal is in place, Canada will have to negotiate a bilateral agreement with the European Commission to begin discussions with member states about procurement opportunities. A Canadian official briefing reporters on the summit Saturday said the initial agreement will allow for Canada's participation in some joint procurement projects. However, a second agreement will be needed to allow Canadian companies to bid. At the EU-Canada summit, leaders are also expected to issue a joint statement to underscore a willingness for continued pressure on Russia, including through further sanctions, and call for an immediate and permanent ceasefire in Gaza. After Brussels, Carney heads to The Hague in the Netherlands for the NATO leaders' summit on Tuesday and Wednesday. There, Carney will meet with the King of the Netherlands and later with leaders of Nordic nations to discuss Arctic and transatlantic security. At the NATO summit, Carney will take part in bilateral meetings with other leaders. The summit agenda includes a social dinner hosted by the king and queen of the Netherlands and a two-and-a-half hour meeting of the North Atlantic Council. NATO allies are expected to debate a plan to hike alliance members' defence spending target to five per cent of national GDP. NATO data shows that in 2024, none of its 32 members spent that much. The Canadian government official who briefed reporters on background says the spending target and its timeline are still up for discussion, though some allies have indicated they would prefer a seven-year timeline while others favour a decade. Canada hasn't hit a five- per- cent defence spending threshhold since the 1950s and hasn't reached the two per cent mark since the late 1980s. NATO says that, based on its estimate of which expenditures count toward the target, Canada spent $41 billion in 2024 on defence, or 1.37 per cent of GDP. That's more than twice what it spent in 2014, when the two per cent target was first set; that year, Canada spent $20.1 billion, or 1.01 per cent of GDP, on defence. In 2014, only three NATO members achieved the two per cent target — the U.S., the U.K., and Greece. In 2025, all members are expected to hit it. Any agreement to adopt a new spending benchmark must be ratified by all 32 NATO member states. Former Canadian ambassador to NATO Kerry Buck told The Canadian Press the condensed agenda is likely meant to 'avoid public rifts among allies,' describing Trump as an 'uncertainty engine.' 'The national security environment has really, really shifted,' Buck said, adding allies next door to Russia face the greatest threats. 'There is a high risk that the U.S. would undercut NATO at a time where all allies are increasingly vulnerable.' Trump has suggested the U.S. might abandon its mutual defence commitment to the alliance if member countries don't ramp up defence spending. 'Whatever we can do to get through this NATO summit with few public rifts between the U.S. and other allies on anything, and satisfy a very long-standing U.S. demand to rebalance defence spending, that will be good for Canada because NATO's good for Canada,' Buck said. Carney has already made two trips to Europe this year — the first to London and Paris to meet with European allies and the second to Rome to attend the inaugural mass of Pope Leo XIV. This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 22, 2025. Catherine Morrison, The Canadian Press
CBC
2 hours ago
- CBC
Iran warns of 'everlasting consequences' after U.S. attacks 3 nuclear sites
The latest: Trump says stealth bombers hit sites in Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan. Iran's nuclear agency confirms attacks, says work will not be stopped. Iran said 'no sign of contamination' as a result of the attacks. Israeli airspace has been closed to inbound and outbound travel, but it's not clear for how long. Netanyahu praises U.S. decision that 'will change history.' UN secretary general brands U.S. decision as 'dangerous escalation.' Tehran says 'U.S. has … launched a dangerous war against Iran.' International Atomic Energy Agency to hold an emergency meeting. EU foreign policy chief says foreign ministers will gather on Monday. U.S. military leaders to hold briefing at 8 a.m. ET Sunday. Tehran accused Washington of launching "a dangerous war" after President Donald Trump said the U.S. attacked three sites in Iran on Sunday and claimed key nuclear sites were "completedly and fully obliterated." Iran's Foreign Ministry said Washington had "betrayed diplomacy" with the military strikes in support of Israel, which has been engaged in a nine-day war with Iran in an attempt to destroy its nuclear program. Now, "the U.S. has itself launched a dangerous war against Iran," the ministry said in a lengthy statement. "The Islamic Republic of Iran reserves its right to resist with full force against U.S. military aggression and the crimes committed by this rogue regime, and to defend Iran's security and national interests." Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi warned in a post on X Sunday that the U.S. attacks "will have everlasting consequences." There's been no independent damage assessment in the wake of the U.S. attacks. The Atomic Energy Organization of Iran confirmed they took place on its Fordow, Isfahan and Natanz sites, but it insisted its nuclear program won't be stopped. Iran and the UN nuclear watchdog said there were no immediate signs of radioactive contamination at the three locations following the strikes. After announcing the attacks on social media, Trump gave an address to the nation from the White House, saying, "There will either be peace or there will be tragedy for Iran." It was not clear is the U.S. would continue attacking Iran alongside its ally Israel. Trump, who acted without congressional authorization, he warned there would be additional strikes if Tehran retaliated against U.S. forces. Tehran says Washington 'betrayed diplomacy' Hours after the American attacks, Iran's paramilitary Revolutionary Guard said it launched 40 missiles at Israel, including its Khorramshahr-4, which can carry multiple warheads. Israeli authorities reported more than 80 people suffered mostly minor injuries, and there were reports of damage in the cities of Haifa and Tel Aviv and along the coast. WATCH | What's the endgame in Israel's war on Iran?: Israel's war on Iran: What's the endgame? | About That 3 days ago Duration 15:36 A week after Israel's initial strikes on nuclear and military targets across Iran, many are asking: What comes next? As deadly attacks and counterattacks between the two countries continue with no end yet in sight, Andrew Chang explores what Israel's endgame might be in its war with Iran and why its ambitions could go well beyond preventing Iran from developing a nuclear bomb. (Images provided by Getty Images, The Canadian Press and Reuters) Following the Iranian barrage, Israel's military said it had "swiftly neutralized" the Iranian missile launchers that had fired and it had begun a series of strikes toward military targets in western Iran. Iran has maintained its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only, and U.S. intelligence agencies have assessed that Tehran is not actively pursuing a bomb. However, Trump and Israeli leaders have argued Iran could quickly assemble a nuclear weapon, making it an imminent threat. The decision to directly involve the U.S. in the war comes after more than a week of strikes by Israel that significantly degraded Iran's air defences and offensive missile capabilities, and damaged its nuclear enrichment facilities. But U.S. and Israeli officials have said American B-2 stealth bombers and the 30,000-pound bunker-buster bomb that only they have been configured to carry offered the best chance of destroying heavily fortified sites connected to the Iranian nuclear program buried deep underground. Israel announced Sunday that it had closed its airspace to both inbound and outbound flights in the wake of the U.S. attacks. Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu praised Trump's decision to attack in a video message directed at the American president. "Your bold decision to target Iran's nuclear facilities, with the awesome and righteous might of the United States, will change history." Netanyahu said the U.S. "has done what no other country on Earth could do." The White House and Pentagon did not immediately elaborate on the operation. U.S. military leaders are scheduled to provide a briefing at 8 a.m. E.T. Sunday that CBC will carry live. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) wrote on X that there has been "no increase in off-site radiation levels" after the strikes, but it would continue to monitor the situation. Iran wants an investigation of the U.S. strikes on its nuclear sites, its nuclear chief Mohammad Eslami said in a letter to IAEA's chief, Rafael Grossi, urging him to condemn the U.S. action and take appropriate measures, according to Iran's SNN news network. Eslami criticized Grossi for his "inaction and complicity," and added Iran would pursue appropriate legal measures to tackle the matter. Grossi said on Sunday that he'd be calling an emergency meeting of his agency's 35-nation board of governors after the U.S. attacks. Trump's decision to attack The decision to attack was a risky one for Trump, who won the White House partially on the promise of keeping the U.S. out of costly foreign conflicts and scoffed at the value of American interventionism. But Trump also vowed he would not allow Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon and he had initially hoped the threat of force would bring the country's leaders to give up its nuclear program peacefully. For months, Trump said he was dedicated to a diplomatic push to persuade Iran to give up its nuclear ambitions. In April and again in late May, he persuaded Netanyahu to hold off on military action against Iran and give diplomacy more time. After Israel began striking Iran, Trump went from publicly expressing hope that the moment could be a "second chance" for Iran to make a deal to delivering explicit threats on Khamenei and making calls for Tehran's unconditional surrender. The U.S. president has bristled at criticism from some supporters who have suggested that further U.S. involvement would be a betrayal to those who were drawn to his promise to end U.S. involvement in expensive and endless wars. Fears of a broader war UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres called the U.S. attacks a "dangerous escalation" as world leaders began chiming in with calls for diplomacy. "There is a growing risk that this conflict could rapidly get out of control - with catastrophic consequences for civilians, the region and the world," he said in a statement. Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen who had threatened to resume attacks on U.S. vessels in the Red Sea if the Trump administration joined Israel's military campaign called on other Muslim nations to form "one front against the Zionist-American arrogance." On Wednesday, Khamenei warned the U.S. that strikes targeting the Islamic Republic will "result in irreparable damage for them." Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei declared "any American intervention would be a recipe for an all-out war in the region." The Israeli military said Saturday it was preparing for the possibility of a lengthy war, while Iran's foreign minister warned before the U.S. attack that American military involvement "would be very, very dangerous for everyone." WATCH | Iranian Canadian worried about her father: 'I would love to have him here, I just don't know how': Iranian Canadian worried for her father 11 hours ago Duration 6:54 Iranian Canadian Bahar Montamedian, whose 72-year-old father is currently stranded in Iran amid Israeli strikes, told CBC News she wants the federal government to find a way to bring not only citizens out of Iran but also valid temporary visa holders like her father. "I just want my dad to be here. I don't know when will be the next time I can see him or talk to him," Montamedian said. After the U.S. attacks, European Union foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas on Sunday urged all sides to return to the negotiating table. "Iran must not be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon," Kallas said in a post on X. "I urge all sides to step back, return to the negotiating table and prevent further escalation," she said, adding that EU foreign ministers will discuss the situation on Monday. Israeli strikes on Iran have killed at least 865 people and wounded 3,396 others, according to the Washington-based group Human Rights Activists. The group said of those dead, it identified 363 civilians and 215 security force personnel.
